An intermittent cervical traction modality with closed-loop traction force control based on EMG biofeedback was developed and used for clinical study. This system consists of a EMG scanner, on-line self-adjusted traction force controller, audio/video alarm system, real time therapeutic status display, computer interface hardware, and control software. Twenty-four subjects with diagnosed cervical radiculopathy and muscle spasm symptom who were randomly divided into two groups served as subjects in this study. The control and experimental groups were treated with conventional open loop and new EMG biofeedback closed loop traction control protocols respectively. The results of this study indicate that the average reductions in paraspinal EMG signal during traction after 7 weeks treatment for experimental and control groups were 71 and 50 percent, respectively (p < 0.001). These results not only support the clinical use of intermittent, sitting traction to produce cervical paraspinal muscle relaxation, but also revealed that the average myoelectric activity of cervical paraspinal muscle during traction was reduced as traction force increased over the 7-week duration of traction treatment. Through EMG biofeedback traction force control, muscle injury, neck soreness, or pain after traction may be avoided.

Issue Section:
Technical Briefs
Topics:
Design, Electromyography, Traction, Muscle, Force control, Computer software, Computers, Control equipment, Hardware, Relaxation (Physics), Signals, Wounds
1.
Valtenen
E. J.
,
Kiuru
E.
, “
Cervical Traction as a Therapeutic Tool—A Clinical Analysis Based on 212 Patients
,”
Scand J Rehabil Med.
, Vol.
2, 1
, pp.
29
–
36
,
1970
.
2.
Nanno
M.
, “
Effects of Intermittent Cervical Traction on Muscle Pain— Flowmetric and Electromyographic Studies of the Cervical Paraspinal Muscle
,”
Nippon Ika Duigaku Zusshi
, Vol.
61, 2
, pp.
137
–
147
,
1994
.
3.
Caldwell
J. W.
,
Krusen
E. M.
, “
Effectiveness of Cervical Traction in Treatment of Neck Problem: Evaluation of Various Methods
,”
Arch Phys Med Rehabil
, Vol.
43
, p.
214
214
,
1962
.
4.
Wong
A. M. K.
,
Leong
C.
,
Chen
C. M.
, “
The Traction Angle and Cervical Intervertebral Separation
,”
Spine
, Vol.
17, 2
, pp.
136
–
138
,
1992
.
5.
Saunders
H. D.
, “
Use of Spinal Traction in the Treatment of Neck and Back Conditions
,”
Clin Orthop
, Vol.
179
, p.
31
31
,
1983
.
6.
Colachis
S. C.
,
Strohm
B. R.
, “
Radiographic Studies of Cervical Spine Motion in Normal Subjects, Flexion and Hyperextension
,”
Arch Phys Med Rehabil
, Vol.
46
, p.
753
753
,
1965
.
7.
Wall, P. D., “The Mechanisms of Pain Associated With Cervical Traction Disease,” Hirsch, C., Zoherman, Y., eds., Cervical Pain, Proceedings of the International Symposium in Wenner-Gren Center, Oxford, England, Pergamon, pp. 201–210, 1972.
8.
Geiringer, S. R., Kincaid, C. B., Rechtein, J. J., “Traction, Manipulation and Massage,” Rehabilitation Medicine: Principals and Practice, J. A. DeLisa, ed., Philadelphia, J. B. Lippincott, 1988, p. 3109.
9.
Harris
P. R.
, “
Cervical Traction: Review of Literature and Treatment Guidelines
,”
Physical Therapy
, Vol.
57
, pp.
910
–
914
,
1977
.
10.
Jette
D. U.
,
Falkel
J. E.
,
Trombly
C.
, “
Effect of Intermittent Spine Cervical Traction on the Myoelectric Activity of the Upper Trapezius Muscle in Subjects With Neck Pain
,”
Physical Therapy
, Vol.
65, 8
, pp.
1173
–
1176
,
1985
.
11.
Krebs, D. E., “Biofeedback in Neuromuscular Re-Education and Gait Training,” Biofeedback, 2nd ed., Mark S. Schwartz and Associates, pp. 525–559, 1995.
12.
Fogel, E. R., “Biofeedback-Assisted Musculoskeletal Therapy and Neuromuscular Re-Education,” Biofeedback, 2nd ed., Mark S. Schwartz and Associates, pp. 560–593, 1995.
This content is only available via PDF.
Copyright © 1996
 by The American Society of Mechanical Engineers
You do not currently have access to this content.